The Sylvan social care debate considered the following motion:
This house supports the government’s plan to reform social care.
The debate took place on Monday, 4th October. David Kerry proposed the motion and Elaine McLean opposed it.
The proposition supporting the government’s social care plan
The proposer pointed out the critical nature of social care to the country, with 900k adults in some kind of long-term care. Many more have to pay for their own care, and may lose their homes. At the same time, care providers face unstable finances. Covid has pressured the NHS and there are 100k vacancies in the care system. Yet no government has enacted significant reform in decades. The new government approach will have social care integrated with healthcare, and a new tax to fund it. This approach mirrors insurance, with workers paying now and withdrawing later in life. For most people the cost will be minimal, though for the very poor every pound counts. Big businesses will pay more. This will raise £12b, the first proposal to put money in. Something must be done – it is time to make some movement to address this issue.
The opposition against the motion
The opposer related her own personal experience with social care in respect of mental health issues. She used an integrated health and social care service, though had to wait 18 months to access it. She quoted the government paper: ‘The government is committed to responsible management of public finances.’ But how many buddies of ministers have benefitted in the last year? How much of this new tax revenue will be spent on social care? The armed forces budget could be used for this instead. Integrated services are available in 12 centres, but not everywhere. Mental health is a major issue, particularly with covid, which has led to increased suicides. Needs have increased and we spent only £500m on it last year. What the country needs is a long-term plan, where you don’t have to have money to be able to access the system.
Floor speeches from the audience of the social care debate
Floor speakers almost universally agreed that the system requires significant reforms. Many criticised the government for calling their latest proposals on social care a ‘plan’ and viewed it as wholly inadequate. Several blamed the shortage of labour in the care system on Brexit. A key theme that ran through the debate centred on the young funding the old, with divergent views based largely on the age of the speaker. The current older generation paid for the war generation’s old age care, making it fair to continue this approach. In comparison, Germany has developed a functioning, integrated health and social care system which covers catastrophic costs.
Some speakers sought to identify other sources of funding for social care including closing offshore tax loopholes. Others pointed out that the National Insurance tax is highly regressive, actually hitting the poor proportionally more than the rich. Billionaires should pay, along with large tech companies that pay little tax today.
The opposer’s rebuttal in the social care debate
In rebuttal, the opposer reiterated the government’s statement about ‘responsible’ management of finances. Many speakers agreed they haven’t done so. The armed forces budget could be cut 25% to support the NHS and social care. Young people today believe in YOLO – you only live once. Yet when the proposer was young she saved if she wanted something. The Tories: all about ‘me, me, me’. Google needs to pay, and tax people above an earnings threshold.
The proposer’s closing speech
In closing, the proposer pointed out that he took a difficult side in this debate. He thanked everyone for their passionate contributions and agreed with many points. However, while the reform isn’t perfect, we are where we are, and we’ve got what we’ve got. Do we want something or nothing? The young should invest and be part of society – people have paid in for decades to support the system. The government’s plan includes financing but not what to do. Yet they will create a white paper to outline the needed reforms. The electorate voted this government in, and we need to move forward.
Result: in the final vote, the social care debate motion did not carry
The Sylvans concluded through the social care debate that they do not support the government’s social care plan.
See information on other Sylvan debates here.